Curriculum Studies Assignment

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studies A critical review of a Grade 10 Introductory Physics course as part of the International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme, examining selected aims and purposes and analyzing the extent to which these are, in my experience, achieved in practice. Stephen Taylor MA International Education University of Bath (@IBiologyStephen) This assignment was submitted as part of my MA coursework in August 2012. It is uploaded here to be part of my online professional development and reflection portfolio at is.gd/IBiologyReflections.

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesIntroduction What happens when an unstoppable force encounters an immovable object? The ‘unstoppable force paradox’ of Physics can be used as an analogy in education: as curriculum theories develop and our body of understanding on how students learn grows, change is inevitable in educational planning and implementation. With changing curriculum comes the necessity to update our practice as educators, to adapt to meet the needs of our students and to adjust the way we teach in order to meet the requirements of new curriculum. However, the unstoppable force of curriculum development often collides with the immovable object of resistance to change and the perceived difficulties associated with adapting or re-‐writing the established syllabus. As educators we are agents of change: it is our responsibility to facilitate these changes in a way that will benefit our learners and meet the aims and objectives of the wider curriculum model. The analogy of the unstoppable force paradox particularly suits this international school in Japan, with its 100-‐year history of academic success. The school has been running the International Baccalaureate’s Diploma Programme (IBDP) as a graduating qualification for students aged 16-‐19 for thirty years and has traditions and academic systems – and therefore a written curriculum -‐ that are firmly established. However, the introduction of the Middle Years Programme (MYP, students aged 11-‐16) and Primary Years Programme (PYP, students aged 4-‐11) are very recent. These new curriculum models, along with changing leadership, a shift in the student body and adapting to new learning technologies and educational paradigms, have thrust the school into a period of rapid change. There is tension between the old and the new; between the established and the developing; and between the ideas of curriculum as syllabus and of curriculum as a wider, more total learning experience. This tension is enhanced by the fact that the MYP itself is undergoing a major review (IB, 2011a). Already existing as a broad curriculum framework, the resulting “Next Chapter” will emphasise further the concept-‐based nature of teaching and learning and seek to better articulate the three IB programmes into a continuum of learning. The MYP is evolving into a programme that could be seen as a ‘greatest hits’ collection of curriculum theory, with diverse yet well-‐known sources and foundations. At the moment however there is an atmosphere of uncertainty as we await the official publication of new subject guides and documentation in 2014. 2

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesIn this assignment I aim to critically review the current state of a one-‐semester (18-‐week) Grade 10 Introductory Physics course as part of the wider whole of the MYP. The course is taught with a partner teacher and is built around a core syllabus, which reflects typical high-‐school-‐level preparatory Physics content, based loosely on National Science Education Standards (NSES) from the USA (NSES, 1997). We are adapting the course to better meet the aims and objectives of the MYP, as well as current best practices in Physics instruction and preparing for the wide-‐reaching curriculum changes which are to be part of the MYP’s ‘Next Chapter’. Appendix I features a summary of the content, unit questions, enduring understandings and assessed tasks for the Physics course. I will build upon a foundation in curriculum theory to analyse the extent to which, in my experience, the course meets the needs of its stakeholders, as well as a selection of the MYP sciences aims and objectives (full description in Appendix II) (IB, 2010a): • “Acquire scientific knowledge and skills,” • “Develop critical, creative and inquiring minds that pose questions, solve problems, construct explanations, judge arguments and make informed decisions in scientific and other contexts.” • “Develop awareness of the moral, ethical, social, economic, political, cultural and environmental implications of the practice of using science and technology.” These aims have been chosen as they represent apparently contrasting approaches to curriculum as part of one curriculum model: the acquisition of knowledge and skills in contrast with a concept-‐based approach to application and problem-‐solving; and a content-‐driven focus in contrast with values-‐based education. I will give a discussion of some issues in curriculum studies that are pertinent to these aims in relation to our Physics course, before identifying strengths and weaknesses and making some recommendations for improvements in the next cycle of teaching and learning. In order to achieve this, we must consider the role of various stakeholders in the curriculum framework as a whole and in our own Physics course. The learners in the course fall into two distinct categories: those who will go on to IBDP Physics at a standard or higher level, and therefore must be adequately prepared; and those students who are terminating their Physics education upon completion, yet still need to be prepared to study other sciences in the IBDP. The teachers who will accept these students into their IBDP class are under considerable time pressure to get results in a 3

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studieshigh-‐stress two-‐year programme; they require their students to be well prepared in order to allow them to focus on preparation for largely content-‐driven, high-‐stakes terminal assessment. In our context, these are the same teachers involved in delivering the MYP 4-‐5 curriculum, so have the benefit of acting as the bridge between the MYP and the DP. The framework nature of the MYP allows for – even requires -‐ these teachers to be fundamentally involved in the school-‐based portion of the curriculum design (IB, 2008). As a result, we have a buy-‐in in what we teach, although within parameters limited by the needs of other stakeholders: we are the “change-‐agents in the school,” (Kelly, 2004, p.116), and the autonomy afforded by this should allow for a research-‐based and iterative cycle of curriculum improvement. The decision to move into the MYP was taken a school level, yet curriculum is not ‘done to us’, we have the power to develop and improve the programme we teach. As many of our students apply to US universities, the counseling office here at school, as well as the admissions officers at target universities, act as another set of stakeholders in the course. Closely related to this is the school itself, as its reputation, at least to some extent, depends on the academic success of our students and prestige of their destinations universities. Alongside this, our programmes are audited by the Council of International Schools (CIS) and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC); these ‘seals of approval’ are seen as a sign of our quality of education and therefore an economic bargaining chip in the competition with other international schools. Grade point averages (GPA) are calculated from Grade 9 onwards, so the learning and assessment that take place in pre-‐IBDP years can affect the outcome of a student’s applications. What is Curriculum? In the context of the MYP, curriculum must be understood to be more than a syllabus. “Many people still equate a curriculum with a syllabus and thus limit their planning to a consideration of the content or the body of knowledge they wish to transmit…” (Kelly, 2004, p.4) Our Physics course must therefore also fit as a part of a wider curriculum whole; it should be judged as more than the addressing of discrete content or skills-‐driven assessment statements and it should facilitate the emergent properties of a more 4

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studiesholistic curriculum experience. In my experience working alongside teachers – especially those who have seen many iterations of curriculum and generations of students, teachers and school leadership – there is a lingering misconception that “content is king” and that changes to the knowledge items in a course will somehow affect its ‘academic rigour’ or viability. Could this understanding be a result of the memories of educators and parents of their own educational experiences? As educators, we consider ourselves well educated yet our memories of schooling may taint our understanding and therefore practice. We are used to national-‐curriculum style models of education, which are generally based on a prescribed syllabus, set by government or local bodies, based on knowledge that is deemed important for all young people to know. We are used to being asked “what did you learn in school today?” rather than “what values did you develop today?” but this mindset ignores the fact that curriculum is a much wider experience for the learner, with many facets. Denis Lawton gives a concise description of the connection between culture and curriculum here: “… the school curriculum (in the wider sense) is essentially a selection from the culture of a society. Certain aspects of our way of life, certain kinds of knowledge, certain attitudes and values are regarded so important that their transmission to the next generation is not left to chance in society but is entrusted to specially-‐trained professionals (teachers) in elaborate and expensive institutions (schools).“ (Lawton, 1975) (emphasis mine) He suggests that the curriculum represents a portion or snapshot of a culture that is deemed important enough to be expressly articulated and purposefully passed on to students. To me the content-‐driven dogma of traditional curriculum reflects a knowledge-‐as-‐power mindset: “Productive power is [then] fundamentally concerned with disciplinary knowledge.” (Scott, 2008, p.53). With a system of education geared towards university entry, we experience considerable content and assessment backwash, which flows beyond the IB Diploma into the MYP, as we need to ensure students are prepared in order to achieve highly and be competitive applicants. But this also puts power in the hands of the more traditional teachers and curriculum developers, whose rebuttal of change is frequently the need to be competitive. To some, the move into the MYP is seen as a ‘power-‐coercive’ approach to curriculum development, where an ‘empirical-‐rational’ strategy might be needed to ensure the success of the programme (Kelly, 2004, p.111). This aligns with the first, and to some extent the second, of the MYP sciences aims that I identified in the introduction. Our course could not be judged a success – 5

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studiesparticulary in the eyes of those resistant to change – if it does not deliver on content knowledge, skills and preparation for the IB Diploma. However, culture changes over time, and thus so must the curriculum. Further to kinds of knowledge are attitudes and values. It might be comforting to teachers and students (and examining bodies) to be able to boil the outcomes of student learning down into discrete assessed bites of knowledge that can be checked off a list and examined using reliable mass-‐scale methods such as standardized tests, but the curriculum-‐is-‐syllabus view fails to consider the myriad elements of curriculum that really exist. The total curriculum (Kelly, 2004, p.5) represents a more holistic view of the teaching and learning that goes on within (and without) our school walls. This includes the overt, planned, formal and assessed curricula – the intended and documented learning and assessment experiences that are the ‘targets’ of the learning and take place during the school day. However, it also includes the implicit, received, hidden and informal curricula – those learning experiences that may not be formally documented as part of scheduled classes. They may arise as a result of the school ethos, or a teacher’s interaction with a student beyond the content of the course. They are more likely to be attitudinal and values-‐related, yet they also incorporate the element of just-‐in-‐time (or ancillary) learning as students pick up new knowledge and skills in order to complete a set task or negotiate a social situation. For example in our Physics class students might be required to develop methods of collecting and analyzing data to describe the motion of the local train (Appendix I), but could additionally be developing knowledge and skills regarding the use of new tools and software packages. Regardless of what is written on official school planning documents, students are likely to be always learning – for the better or worse – and a total curriculum view recognizes and aims to plan and account for this (Kelly, 2004, p.5). In an interesting contrast with equivalent secondary educational programmes (such as the English General Certificates in Secondary Education, or GCSE’s), the MYP does not have a prescribed syllabus. In fact, the specific content of a course is left up to those responsible for developing the school’s own curriculum, which may or may not be the classroom teachers (IB, 2009). It is a curriculum framework, driven by a clearly-‐defined philosophy through the IB’s Mission Statement: 6

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studies “The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect. To this end the organization works with schools, governments and international organizations to develop challenging programmes of international education and rigorous assessment. These programmes encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate and lifelong learners who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right”. (IB, 2012a) (emphasis mine) As this assignment is focused on the MYP I should draw attention to and build upon the IB’s definitions of curriculum through this assignment (IB, 2008, p.17): “The MYP comprises a composite curriculum model (fig. 1) where each component has equal value. […] Double-‐headed arrows indicate that developing, implementing and monitoring the school’s written, assessed and taught curriculum is an integrated process whereby each component informs the other two.” Figure 1: The curriculum model. (IB, 2008) With the emphasis on developing the learner rather than transmitting a certain set of knowledge, the continuum of the IB’s programmes better represent Kelly’s idea of a total curriculum. The framework model pushes the aims of the MYP in their mission and subject-‐specific guides, yet allows for freedom of content-‐based planning; this can be used to ensure national or state ‘standards’ are met, or students are prepared for other external examinations and qualifications. Whose culture, whose curriculum? The MYP is currently offered in over 900 schools across the globe (IB, 2012b). If we are to think of the curriculum as a selection of a culture, or the “features which produce the school’s ethos” (Marsh, 2009, p.9), then this could offer a real challenge for the IB; how could an international organization with European origins claim to represent the cultures of all of its diverse schools? If the IB were to, as Lawton (1975) suggests, analyse the culture from which they were to take a selection for the curriculum, it would be an insurmountable task; whose culture would result and whose curriculum would it 7

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studiesrepresent? Although it could be perceived that an IB education represents a Euro-‐centric world-‐view (Coates et al., 2007), the curriculum framework model, rather than a prescribed syllabus, should facilitate global flexibility in a schools curriculum planning and assessment. The MYP has clear philosophical goals, based on the IB’s mission and underpinned by the Learner Profile, yet refrains from dictating content for the courses that are offered in its schools. Schools must apply to the IB for authorization to run their programmes, during which process they outline how they will meet the standards and practices of the IB programme to which they are applying (IB, 2012c). Therefore I would argue that by buying into the IB’s programmes, schools are to the greater extent choosing the culture of the IB and its interpretation of the values of internationalism it represents; an IB education and its core philosophy could be seen as a commodity or a product of economic globalization (Cambridge & Thompson, 2004). In measuring the success of our Intro Physics course, I suggest that it should exemplify the values of both internationalism and globalization. From the perspective of internationalism it should “embrace a progressive existential and experiential educational philosophy that values the moral development of the individual and recognizes the importance of service to the community and the development of a sense of responsible citizenship.” (Cambridge & Thompson, 2004) In terms of the globalist view, it should “facilitate educational continuity for the children of the globally mobile clientele,” as well as “for the children of the host country clientele with aspirations towards social and global mobility.” (Cambridge & Thompson, 2004). Our Physics class in essence then should be values-‐based yet internationally recognizable; it should promote international ideals of peace and cooperation yet remain identifiable as a high school standard of academic rigour. From a content-‐based perspective, it is perhaps a globalist product, transferable as a university entry requirement. The elements of internationalism align with the third of the MYP sciences aims I identified in the introduction, so to judge the course ‘successful’, these would need to be an overt and integral part of the educational experience in the Physics class. Ostensibly, our choice of the NSES standards to some extent makes the Physics course representative of the academic culture of the USA; within the international framework of the IB MYP we have chosen to use a set of standards that are recommended for schools in the United States. The intention here is to ensure our course is recognizable 8

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studiesto university admissions offices, yet we may have unintentionally introduced tension between the aims of the programme. I will explore this further in the final analysis of the Physics course. The MYP as a curriculum framework As a learner-‐centred total curriculum framework constructed from a philosophy first perspective, the development of the MYP could be seen as a way of drawing together the most current and relevant ideals of curriculum theory. A full description of the current MYP model is included in Appendix III. Documentation provided by the IB is abundant and diverse, including guides, principles to practice and recent position papers on the continuum of education, holistic education and culture (all 2010) and concept-‐based education (Erickson, 2012). Within each subject guide we see the influence of curriculum theorists. Where syllabus-‐based curricula tend towards the objectives-‐based model of WJ Popham (Scott, 2008, p.21), this was criticized by Lawrence Stenhouse: “…Trivial learning behaviours may be prioritised at the expense of more important outcomes because they are easier to operationalize.” Stenhouse 1975 in (Scott, 2008, p.27) And: “A behavioural objectives model that is underpinned by a taxonomic analysis of knowledge content does not take account of pedagogical knowledge or the way students learn.” (Scott, 2008, p.28) Furthermore: “Stenhouse argues that the teacher should be concerned not only with students’ behavioural changes, but also with wider issues such as the ethical dimension of their behaviour, unexpected outcomes of adopting a rigid behavioural objectives regime, and the consequences of their behaviour on other stakeholders such as parents. This argument assumes that ends and means can be clearly separated, and that the efficient delivery of behavioural objectives can be achieved without the teacher paying any attention to unexpected consequences”. (Scott, 2008, p.28) (emphasis mine) The MYP has leaned more towards Stenhouse’s process-‐based model, including emphasizing the role of self-‐assessment in student work (though the teacher remains the final assessor). “Ethical dimensions of their behavior…” fits with the Learner Profile and “…wider issues…” are the fundamental basis for the Areas of Interaction. The process-‐based model would seem to fit more comfortably with the holistic aims of the 9

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studies MYP, yet the IB have drawn on more than this in their design and development of the programme. The programme becomes further removed from the discrete knowledge items of a syllabus-‐driven system with the new emphasis on concept-‐based curriculum. In this model (fig. 2), Erickson (2008 & 2012) argues that the two-‐dimensional topic or skills based model focuses “… on facts and skills with the goals of content coverage, and the memorization of information” (Erickson, 2012). On the other hand, she argues that: “Three-‐dimensional models focus on concepts, principles and generalizations, using related facts and skills as tools to gain deeper understanding of Figure 2: 2D and 3D instructional models (Erickson, 2008), used in (Erickson, 2012) disciplinary content, transdisciplinary themes and interdisciplinary issues, and to facilitate conceptual transfer through time, across cultures and across situations.” The introduction of the MYP to this school, along with the impending changes to the MYP as a whole, have necessitated a change in the way teaching and learning take place in the high school: the move from 2D to 3D instruction requires some fundamental shifts in curriculum planning and classroom pedagogy. Many of these represent a tension in the way high-‐school sciences in have been traditionally taught, and thus highlight some of the areas for development in our Physics class. Despite this, curriculum review cycle changes on the horizon for IB Diploma sciences do not – in my view -‐ represent a significant shift into the realm of three-‐dimensional instruction. The assessment model remains as a content-‐driven high-‐stakes terminal examination model; the weighting of exams to practical work shifting from 76%: 24% to 80%: 20% (IB, 2012d). In essence, the methods perceived to be required for success in the IB Diploma science better fit with the two-‐dimensional model, whereas the sea change in curriculum and pedagogy in the MYP is heading towards the three-‐dimensional model. For our course to be successful in the aims of the MYP as well as act as a solid 10

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studiespreparation for the Diploma Programme, these tensions between traditional two-‐dimensional and concept-‐based three-‐dimensional instruction must be overcome effectively, in particular these selected tensions identified by Erickson: Two-‐dimensional instruction Three-‐dimensional instruction Goal is increased factual knowledge and Goal is increased conceptual understanding skill development. supported by factual knowledge and skills. Assessment of factual knowledge and skills. Assessment of conceptual understanding ties back to a central idea. Instruction relies on lecture and Instruction is student-‐led and inquiry-‐driven. information-‐dissemination to students. Focus on content (syllabus) coverage. Focus on student understanding and thinking. Selected from a summary table of Erickson’s views of two-‐dimensional versus three-‐dimensional instruction, included in Appendix II. (Erickson, 2012)(Emphasis mine) Judging the success of the Intro Physics course Our Physics course is therefore in a challenging position, as it must perform multiple roles and satisfy the needs of myriad stakeholders. It acts as a preparatory course for students entering DP Physics; as a final course for students who may never study Physics again; as preparation for IBDP internal assessments; and as part of the wider MYP at our school. It survives in a semester of tension, as students make choices for their Diploma Programme subjects while coming to the end of their MYP experience. The sciences also experience a jarring transition from MYP to DP. In the current model, one-‐sixth of sciences assessment in the MYP is potentially exam-‐focused, generally achieved with unit tests; this shifts to 76% of assessment in a series of three terminal exams after two years in the Diploma Programme. There is a significant weight of responsibility on the MYP teachers to help their students succeed in the high-‐stakes Diploma Programme by giving them sufficiently ‘rigorous’ preparation. This responsibility to prepare students for the IB Diploma ties closely with the first of the aims on the MYP sciences I have identified to discuss: “Acquire scientific knowledge and skills” (IB, 2010a). In this respect, I would consider the course to be largely successful. From the perspective of the IBDP Physics teacher, students are able to be successful in his class. The content of the course is based on recognized ‘traditional’ Newtonian physics as outlined in the NSES standards and which also feed into the IB DP Physics course. It fits a logical progression of Physics-‐based learning (Kibble, 1998, 11

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studiesp.99). The articulation of this content and the use of defined command terms fits more in line with Popham’s objectives-‐based model – discrete, unambiguously-‐stated and descriptive performance outcomes (Ross, 2000, p.21) -‐ and prepares students to use the language of assessment in the IBDP sciences courses. Examples of defined command terms are included in Appendix V. However, I would argue that the volume of content defined in the course is too great to be covered in a semester and at the same time meet all the others aims of our course as part of the wider MYP model. This in agreement with the findings of Schmidt et al (2005) in their exploration of data from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), in which student achievement and curriculum standards are compared between the US and other countries. They found that countries with higher-‐achieving students have more coherent, less bloated curricula, with the US curricula more prone to becoming a ‘shopping list’ of content to cover in an aim to appear ‘rigorous’ (Schmidt et al., 2005). I propose that it would be wise for us to look carefully at the level of content included in the course and aim to bring this more in line with countries that typically rank more highly than the US. This may serve a secondary purpose of adding a more authentic element of ‘internationalism’ to our curriculum, whilst modeling the skills and content of more highly-‐achieving countries. The first aim requires students to develop scientific skills as well as knowledge, referring to the ability to design and implement scientific investigations, collect and analyse data and draw conclusions and evaluations. In my experience, I see our course as being particularly successful. It is largely based in practical investigation, modeling and data analysis. Descriptors of three of the assessment criteria, Knowledge and understanding in Science, Scientific inquiry and Data processing (see appendix II), are universal in the MYP sciences, as are the assessment criteria of the various scientific disciplines of he IB Diploma. As a result, skills developed in the Physics course are transferable and allow students to be successful in the IB Diploma, whether they study Physics, Chemistry or Biology. The assessment criteria also emphasize the importance of critical inquiry and analysis of data and ideas over simple memorization. This leads into the second of the aims, to “… develop critical, creative and inquiring minds that pose questions, solve problems, construct explanations, judge arguments and make informed decisions in scientific and other contexts” (IB, 2010a) Although students are generally 12

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studiesable to meet these descriptors with support, it highlights an area for improvement in our course design and implementation. It is quite a linear course, following a traditional ‘Newtonian’ pathway with set assessment tasks. Although instruction generally follows Erickson’s three-‐dimensional model, there is significant scope for improvement or adjustment and I feel that there is potential to open up the choices of topics and assessments to students yet retain the core philosophy of concept-‐based learning. In an attempt to cover the content, we are conforming to Popham’s model, where we perhaps should be exploring more open models such as suggested by Erickson. The final aim of the MYP sciences I have chosen to identify is to “…develop awareness of the moral, ethical, social, economic, political, cultural and environmental implications of the practice of using science and technology” (IB, 2010a). In this respect the MYP as a whole and our physics course within are, in my experience, very successful. Sciences assessment criterion A: One World is designed in such a way that students are required to address the implications stated above in their discussion and analysis of the use of science. I see the One World criterion as one example of the IB’s development of a total curriculum, encompassing values education and internationalism, which lies in contrast to other, less holistic programmes such as content-‐driven iGCSE’s or Advanced Placement (AP) courses. This criterion is assessed throughout the course, with students engaging in a community project (speeding drivers) and research on the applications of science in the global context (safety in sudden accelerations and sustainable energy issues). Furthermore, we take care to connect the One World issues of science with the content being studied at any given time – to try to ensure that students see science as something that is key to solutions to local and global issues rather than a discrete academic discipline that is reduced to a simple set of assessment statements. However, some students still perceive the course in this light, and the cultural relevance of science is an area for improvement in the design and delivery of our programme. Strengthening the course Curriculum is always in flux, just as culture is always changing. Our course does fulfill its role as an adequate preparation for the high-‐stakes IB Diploma Programme and we make a concerted effort to bring in elements of internationalism, concept-‐based learning and the moral, ethical and social implications of science in the global context. 13

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesThe course could also be judged against Stenhouse’s definition of curriculum (1975, p4) as "…an attempt to communicate the essential principles and features of an educational proposal in such a form that it is open to critical scrutiny and capable of effective translation into practice." I would argue that our course meets the definition put forward by Stenhouse in that it is well articulated in a public form (website, curriculum documents), and is scrutinized by teachers and coordinators on an annual basis. My teaching partner and I frequently analyse the content and assessment of the course, in order to make sure it is meeting the aims that have been set and it has evolved a long way from its origins as a simple content-‐driven syllabus in the days before the school had the MYP. In documenting our curriculum and reviewing it on a regular basis, we are increasing our ability to put the wider aims of the MYP into practice and I feel that the course and the educational experience of the students is improving as a whole. The freedom we have to design the content, learning experiences and assessment tasks withing the MYP sciences framework is a further strength of the programme. Although the initial introduction of the MYP to the school (and to a lesser extent curriculum updates from the IB) may have been seen by some teachers as a ‘power-‐coercive’ strategy to impose curriculum on teachers (Kelly, 2004, p.111), my strong feeling is that we are in a much more ‘normative-‐reeducative’ phase of the MYP in our school. There is abundant professional development and we have significant autonomy on the development and implementation of curriculum in our courses – we are the “change agents” with the IB acting as our “outside support agency” (Kelly, 2004, p.116). This environment therefore will allow us to take action on some of the areas for improvement identified in this essay, in order to strengthen the course. As a first recommendation, I feel strongly that we should reduce the ‘shopping list’ as it is too much to carry as well as doing the aims of the MYP sciences justice. Although discrete knowledge and understanding items are clearly defined in terms of their outcomes (see appendix I), students find them useful and they are in line with the assessment statements of the IB Diploma Physics syllabus, the volume of content leads into a prescriptive course with little room for genuine inquiry in the short semester allotted. With the evolution of the MYP into a concept-‐based model, I feel that we can allow for greater student-‐led inquiry under the same key concepts. For instance, the first unit question of “How do we describe change?” could easily be applied to other 14

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studieselements of Physics, such as light and sound, tapping into students’ interests in a more authentic manner. Furthermore, a reduced content load would allow for greater time spent on scientific investigation, developing key skills in experimental design, data processing, analysis and evaluation that are fundamental for success in all of the IB Diploma sciences, not just physics. Reducing the volume of discrete content components would weaken the framing of the course, giving the teachers and students more control of the direction of inquiries, as described by Bernstein (Ross, 2000, p.77). As a result, it will allow us to further develop the pedagogy of the course, moving from the two-‐dimensional model of content-‐driven teaching into the three-‐dimensional model of concept-‐based learning (Erickson, 2012). I would hope also that it would allow the course to be more culturally relevant to our students, giving opportunities to adapt content to suit their own needs, personal backgrounds and potential university destinations. Through making these changes, I would hope to see a greater level of student engagement in active, self-‐directed learning, without sacrificing ‘academic rigour’ or producing learners who are under-‐prepared for the challenges of the IB Diploma. My final recommendation is more personal, yet pertinent to this course. As MYP Coordinator I am the “change-‐agent” for the MYP in our school, yet I am keen to push this into a greater role as an action-‐researcher (Kelly, 2004, p.118). In doing so, I would hope to establish a culture of critical inquiry on curriculum issues in our school, in particular with regard to “…the planning, design, and organization of curriculum including attention to matters of content selection and emphasizing scientific and epistemiological issues in the selection of school curriculum content.” (Pinar, 2003, p.7).This is starting to get underway under our new leadership, with teachers looking at data-driven student learning goals, and I would like it to develop into a deeper culture ofevidence-based and forward-thinking attention to curriculum across the school. Globalisation and the evolution of culture -‐ and therefore curriculum -‐ may be unstoppable forces, but our teaching does not need to be an immovable object. 15

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studies ReferencesCambridge, J. & Thompson, J., 2004. Internationalism and globalization as contexts forinternational education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education,32(4), pp.161-75.Coates, H., Rosicka, C. & MacMahon-Ball, M., 2007. Perceptions of the InternationalBaccalaureate Diploma Programme among Australian and New Zealand Universities.ACER.Erickson, H.L., 2008. Stirring the Head, Heart and Soul: Redefining curriculum, instructionand concept-based learning.. Third. ed. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Corwin Press.Erickson, H.L., 2012. Concept-based teaching and learning (pdf). [Online] InternationalBaccalaureate Organization Available at:http://blogs.ibo.org/positionpapers/2012/07/12/concept-based-teaching-and-learning/[Accessed 18 July 2012].IB, 2008. MYP: From principles to practice [Note: Password protected]. Cardiff, UK:International Baccalaureate Organisation. Available at: http://ibo.org [accessed 18 October2011].IB, 2009. The Middle Years Programme: A basis for practice (pdf). Cardiff, UK:International Baccaluareate Organisation. Available at: http://occ.ibo.org [accessed 4January 2012].IB, 2010a. MYP Coordinators Handbook (pdf). Cardiff, UK: International BaccalaureateOrganisation. Available at: http://occ.ibo.org/ [accessed 4 January 2012].IB, 2010a. MYP: Sciences guide. For use from January 2011. Cardiff, UK: InternationalBaccaluareate Organisation. Available at: http://occ.ibo.org [accessed 30 January 2011].IB, 2010c. Command terms in the MYP. Cardiff, UK: International BaccalaureateOrganisation.IB, 2011a. MYP Statistical Bulletin, November 2011 moderation session (pdf) [Note:password protected]. [Online] Available at:http://www.ibo.org/facts/statbulletin/mypstats/index.cfm [Accessed 12 February 2012].IB, 2011a. MYP: the next chapter. Project report October 2011. [Online] Available at:http://occ.ibo.org [Accessed 25 November 2011].IB, 2011. Development Report: MYP Sciences guide (pdf). [Online] Available at:http://occ.ibo.org [Accessed 5 November 2011].IB, 2012a. Mission and strategy. [Online] Available at: http://www.ibo.org/mission/[Accessed 20 July 2012].IB, 2012b. School Statistics. [Online] Available at:http://www.ibo.org/facts/schoolstats/progsbycountry.cfm [Accessed 21 June 2012]. 16

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesIB, 2012c. How to become an International Baccalaureate® World School. [Online]Available at: http://www.ibo.org/become/index.cfm [Accessed 30 July 2012].IB, 2012d. Curriculum review report: Physics (pdf). [Online] Available at: http://ibo.org[Accessed 23 June 2012d].IB, 2012. IB Fast Facts. [Online] Available at: http://www.ibo.org/facts/fastfacts/ [Accessed20 February 2012].Kelly, A.V., 2004. The Curriculum: Theory and Practice. [online]. SAGE Publications.Available from: http://lib.myilibrary.com?ID=37096. Accessed19 June 2012.Kibble, B., 1998. Forces.. In M. Ratcliffe, ed. ASE Guide to Secondary Science Education.Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.Lawton, D., 1975. Class, Culture and the Curriculum. [online]. Routledge & Kegan PaulLtd.Marsh, C.J., 2009. Key Concepts for Understanding Curriculum. Teachers Library Series.[online]. 4th ed. Taylor & Francis. Available from: http://lib.myilibrary.com?ID=208487.[Accessed 19 June 2012].Nicolson, M. & Hannah, L., 2010. History of the Middle Years Programme (pdf). [Online]Available at: http://occ.ibo.org [Accessed 14 February 2012].NSES, 1997. Science Content Standards. [Online] National Academies Press, USA.Available at: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=4962&page=103 [Accessed 20July 2012].Pinar, W.F., 2003. International Handbook of Curriculum Research. [online]. LawrenceErlbaum Associates, Inc. Available from:http://www.questiaschool.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=104616065#. [Accessed 19 June 2012].Ross, A., 2000. Curriculum: Construction and Critique. [online]. Taylor & Francis.Available from: http://lib.myilibrary.com?ID=2011. [Accessed 19 June 2012].Schmidt, W.H., Wang, H.C. & McKnight, C.C., 2005. Curriculum coherence: anexamination of US mathematics and science content standards from an internationalperspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(5), pp.525-59.Scott, D., 2008. Critical Essays on Major Curriculum Theorists. [online]. Taylor & Francis.Available from: http://lib.myilibrary.com?ID=94328. Accessed 18 June 2012.Stenhouse, L., 1975. An introduction to curriculum research and development. London:Heinemann. 17

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studies Appendices Appendix I: Summary course of our Grade 10 Intro Physics course [Selected from our ATLAS rubicon, based on MYP Unit Planners] Unit 1: Describing Motion (kinematics) Unit Question Selected Assessment Statements (content) How can we describe change? • Distinguish between scalars and vectors. Enduring Understanding(s) • Distinguish between distance and displacement. • Describe displacement of an object using components Change can be communicated using (coordinates), magnitude and direction and directed line descriptions, graphical segment vector diagrams. representations and quantities. • Describe motion of an object in a given direction based on positive and negative displacement. • Calculate distance and displacement from a map. • Plot distance and displacement graphs from raw data or a strobe diagram • Distinguish between instantaneous and average speed/velocity. • Calculate average speed and velocity from a displacement-‐ time graph or set of recorded data. • Draw and analyze vector diagrams to show velocity (magnitude and direction)Summative assessment tasks Criterion A: One World Community speeding driver project Criterion B: Communication in Science Describing motion of Olympic sprinters Criterion C: Knowledge & Understanding Unit test, criterion-‐graded. Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry Design a method to measure and communicate the Criterion E: Processing Data motion of the Rokko Liner train. Criterion F: Attitudes in Science Self, peer and teacher-‐assessed in lab work. Unit 2: Forces and Motion Unit Question Selected Assessment Statements (content) How do interactions cause change? • State that forces cause change in shape and/or change in motion Enduring Understanding(s) • Describe the common forces Change is the result of unbalanced net • Explain how the magnitude of a force can be measured force. • Calculate the weight of an object on Earth from its mass • State Newtons first law of Motion: Inertia • Draw free body diagrams • State Newtons second law of motion: Acceleration • Define net force • Distinguish between balanced forces (equiibrium) and unbalanced forces on an object • Explain the effect of balanced or unbalanced forces on an objectSummative assessment tasks Criterion A: One World Article: dangers of sudden acceleration, topics Criterion B: Communication in Science based on student interest. Criterion C: Knowledge & Understanding Unit test, criterion-‐graded. Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry Can a regular spring be used to measure force? Criterion E: Processing Data Student-‐designed investigation. Criterion F: Attitudes in Science Self, peer and teacher-‐assessed in lab work. 18

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesUnit 3: Energy, Work and Power Unit Question Selected Assessment Statements (content) How does energy transfer produce • Define energy change? • Identify the form(s) of energy possessed by an object or system Enduring Understanding(s) • Distinguish between kinetic and potential energy All physical processes can be • Compare the relative quantities of a form of energy possessed by a set of objects. explained through the transfer of conserved energy. • Define work • Outline how work affects the quantity of energy in an object • Define power • Outline power to the time and work needed to complete a task. • State the SI and commonly used units for work, energy and power • Define efficiency • Apply efficiency to the energy or power needed to complete a task Summative assessment tasks Criterion A: One World Not assessed here. Criterion B: Communication in Science Assessed in the lab report below. Criterion C: Knowledge & Understanding Unit test, criterion-‐graded. Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry Student-‐designed investigation to determine the Criterion E: Processing Data energy in a rubber band or bouncy ball. Criterion F: Attitudes in Science Self, peer and teacher-‐assessed in lab work. Unit 4: Electricity Unit Question Assessment Statements (content) How can we power a community? Enduring Understanding(s) • State that there are two types of electric charge carried by Electricity can be harnessed for the particles such as the electron and proton benefit of humankind. • State and apply the conservation of charge • Describe the difference in electrical properties of conductors and insulators • Explain how objects obtain a net charge through friction (triboelectric effect), contact and induction. • Draw charge distributions and explain electrostatic phenomena • Define electrical power including the relationship to voltage and current • Describe how electricity can be produced using electromagnetic induction • Distinguish between alternating current and direct current Summative assessment tasks Criterion A: One World Not assessed Criterion B: Communication in Science Safety with electricity Criterion C: Knowledge & Understanding Unit test, criterion-‐graded. Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry Modeling the laws of electricity. Criterion E: Processing Data Criterion F: Attitudes in Science Self, peer and teacher-‐assessed in lab work. 19

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesUnit 5: Atomic Science Unit Question Assessment Statements (content) How can we use power responsibly? • Describe the structure of the atom, especially the nucleus. Define the nuclear terms: Nuclide, Nucleon and Isotope Enduring Understanding(s) • • Determine the atomic number, mass number and neutron Atomic energy is one of many sources number for a nuclide using a periodic table of sustainable electricity, yet has • Describe the strong and electrostatic forces in the nucleus. significant risks. • Explain why some nuclei are stable while others are unstable. • Describe the properties of alpha, beta and gamma radiation • Define the term radioactive half-‐life • Outline the basic biological effects of nuclear radiation. • Describe the process of nuclear fission and nuclear fusion • Construct and complete nuclear decay and fission equations • State some uses for nuclear radiation. • Describe the basic operation of nuclear power plantsSummative assessment tasks Criterion A: One World Powering the planet – student investigations into Criterion B: Communication in Science energy sources for sustainability. Criterion C: Knowledge & Understanding Unit test, criterion-‐graded. Criterion D: Scientific Inquiry Modeling radioactive decay. Criterion E: Processing Data Criterion F: Attitudes in Science Self, peer and teacher-‐assessed in lab work. 20

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesAppendix II: (complete) Aims and objectives of the MYP sciences. Taken from the science subject guide (IB, 2010a) Aims The aims of any MYP subject and of the personal project state in a general way what the teacher may expect to teach or do, and what the student may expect to experience or learn. In addition, they suggest how the student may be changed by the learning experience. The aims of the teaching and study of MYP sciences are to encourage and enable students to: 1. develop curiosity, interest and enjoyment towards science and its methods of inquiry 2. acquire scientific knowledge and understanding 3. communicate scientific ideas, arguments and practical experiences effectively in a variety of ways 4. develop experimental and investigative skills to design and carry out scientific investigations and to evaluate evidence to draw a conclusion 5. develop critical, creative and inquiring minds that pose questions, solve problems, construct explanations, judge arguments and make informed decisions in scientific and other contexts 6. develop awareness of the possibilities and limitations of science and appreciate that scientific knowledge is evolving through collaborative activity locally and internationally 7. appreciate the relationship between science and technology and their role in society 8. develop awareness of the moral, ethical, social, economic, political, cultural and environmental implications of the practice and use of science and technology 9. observe safety rules and practices to ensure a safe working environment during scientific activities 10. engender an awareness of the need for and the value of effective collaboration during scientific activities. Objectives The objectives of any MYP subject and of the personal project state the specific targets that are set for learning in the subject. They define what the student will be able to accomplish as a result of studying the subject. These objectives relate directly to the assessment criteria found in the “Sciences assessment criteria” section. A One world This objective refers to enabling students to gain a better understanding of the role of science in society. Students should be aware that science is a global endeavour and that its development and applications can have consequences for our lives. One world should provide students with the opportunity to critically assess the implications of scientific developments and their applications to local and/or global issues. At the end of the course, students should be able to: • explain the ways in which science is applied and used to address specific problems or issues • discuss the effectiveness of science and its application in solving problems or issues • discuss and evaluate the moral, ethical, social, economic, political, cultural and environmental implications of the use of science and its application in solving specific problems or issues. B Communication in science This objective refers to enabling students to become competent and confident when communicating information in science. Students should be able to use scientific language correctly and a variety of communication modes and formats as appropriate. Students should be aware of the importance of acknowledging and appropriately referencing the work of others when communicating in science. At the end of the course, students should be able to: • use scientific language correctly • use appropriate communication modes such as verbal (oral, written), visual (graphic, symbolic) and communication formats (laboratory reports, essays, presentations) to effectively communicate theories, ideas and findings in science • acknowledge the work of others and the sources of information used by appropriately documenting them using a recognized referencing system. C Knowledge and understanding of science 21

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesThis objective refers to enabling students to understand scientific knowledge (facts, ideas, concepts, processes, laws, principles, models and theories) and to apply it to construct scientific explanations, solve problems and formulate scientifically supported arguments. At the end of the course, students should be able to: • recall scientific knowledge and use scientific understanding to construct scientific explanations • apply scientific knowledge and understanding to solve problems set in familiar and unfamiliar situations • critically analyse and evaluate information to make judgments supported by scientific understanding. D Scientific inquiry While the scientific method may take on a wide variety of approaches, it is the emphasis on experimental work that characterizes MYP scientific inquiry. This objective refers to enabling students to develop intellectual and practical skills to design and carry out scientific investigations independently and to evaluate the experimental design (method). At the end of the course, students should be able to: • state a focused problem or research question to be tested by a scientific investigation • formulate a testable hypothesis and explain it using scientific reasoning • design and carry out scientific investigations that include variables and controls, material and/or equipment needed, a method to be followed and the way in which the data is to be collected and processed • evaluate the validity and reliability of the method • judge the validity of a hypothesis based on the outcome of the investigation suggest improvements to the method or further inquiry, when relevant. E Processing data This objective refers to enabling students to collect, process and interpret sufficient qualitative and/or quantitative data to draw appropriate conclusions. Students are expected to develop analytical thinking skills to interpret data and judge the reliability of the data. At the end of the course, students should be able to: • collect and record data using units of measurement as and when appropriate • organize, transform and present data using numerical and visual forms • analyse and interpret data • draw conclusions consistent with the data and supported by scientific reasoning. F Attitudes in science This objective refers to encouraging students to develop safe, responsible and collaborative working practices in practical science. During the course, students should be able to: • work safely and use material and equipment competently • work responsibly with regards to the living and non-‐living environment • work effectively as individuals and as part of a group by collaborating with others. 22

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studies Appendix III: The MYP Curriculum Framework The MYP model, like the PYP and DP, places the fundamental stakeholder, the Learner, at the centre of an octagon. Central to student learning is the Learner Profile, a series of ten core values deemed to be descriptors of traits of a person who embodies the mission of the IB. This is surrounded by the five Areas of Interaction (Health and social education, community and service, human ingenuity, approaches to learning and The current MYP model. Taken from A History of the Middle Years environments), which act as lenses to focus a Programme (Appendix) (Nicolson & Hannah, 2010) unit of inquiry in the class. Moving outward again, we see the eight subject areas, which are to be offered concurrently during a student’s educational experience. Each of these subject areas has its own subject guide, which outlines aims, objectives, key concepts, assessment criteria (all assessment is criterion-‐based) and descriptors for achievement. Units of inquiry in the MYP are intended to be planned in collaboration with another teacher, making authentic connections between subjects where possible. Planning should begin with an area of interaction focus, and build from there with enduring understandings and unit questions, based on a backward-‐design model. Key concepts in each subject area are stated by the IB, though specific factual understandings are not, and these are to be addressed in curriculum planning. This concept-‐based curriculum is heavily guided by the work of H. Lynn Erickson. Lacking a stipulated syllabus the MYP retains the ability to be culturally adaptive: schools can use the content of local systems or standards as the foundation of their ‘what to teach’, yet implement the programme as intended by the MYP. 23

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesAppendix IV: Two-‐dimensional vs. three-‐dimensional instruction, (Erickson, 2012) 24

Stephen Taylor Curriculum StudiesAppendix V: Command Terms in the MYP (IB, 2010c) This is a small selection of the set of definitions of the action verbs now used in MYP documents as a common language of assessment between subjects. 25

Stephen Taylor Curriculum Studies

Curriculum Studies Assignment

by Stephen Taylor on Oct 12, 2012

Accessibility

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 323

Statistics

Curriculum Studies Assignment Document Transcript